4 


1PATESTT  COMTPOITHID)  MAUL  1FOIR  MAil  M;C 


V  V  / 


LIBRARY 
OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


V  A 


Wfi ttixe*-  4*'X‘ 


©  a  ®  ©  sd  t  m = 


Sir, — The  undersigned  begs  leave  to  submit  tor  your  examination, 
his  “  Patent  Compound  Rail”  for  railways,  a  tolerably  correct  view  of 
which  is  given  in  the  above  engraving.  Since  this  rail  was  first  intio- 
duced,  (now  nearly  two  years,)  it  has  more  than  fulfilled  the  expecta¬ 
tions  that  were  entertained  of  it,  and  received  the  approbation  of  all 
who  have  had  it  in  use,  as  well  as  those  who  have  examined  it ;  an 
increasing  interest  is  being  directed  toward  it  in  consequence  of  the 
defects  in  the  ordinary  forms  of  rails,  and  which  become  more  and  moie 
apparent  the  longer  they  are  continued  in  use.  The  object  aimed  at  in 
the  composite  forms,  is  to  'produce,  a  rail  which  shall  approximate  as 
nearly  as  possible  to  a  continuous  bar  from  one  end  to  the  other  of  the 
road.  I  submit  whether  this  is  not  practically  accomplished  by  the 
rail  herewith  offered.  The  cross  joints  in  the  common  form  arc  avoid¬ 
ed  ;  chairs,  clamps,  plates,  or  other  contrivances  lor  securing  the  ends 
of  the  rails,  are  rendered  wholly  unnecessary ;  no  abrupt  depressions 
or  elevations  (occasioned  by  the  settling  of  the  rail  at  the  joints)  occur, 
but  a  smooth  and  even  rolling  surface  is  obtained,  over  which  the  en¬ 
gines  and  cars  pass  with  scarcely  any  noise,  and  without  any  ol  that 
disagreeable  jarring  and  oscillating  motion  usual  upon  the  ordinary 
forms  of  rails. 

If  these  results  attend  the  use  of  the  compound  rail,  it  follows  as  a 
^consequence  that  much  of  the  wear  and  tear  of  l'ails  and  machineiy 
r'  will  he  saved,  for  if  the  rolling  surface  be  uniformly  smooth,  there  will 
.  be  no  concussion  between  the  surfaces  at  rest  and  in  motion ;  and  if  no 
j  concussion,  then  the  engines,  cars,  and  rails  will  last  longer ;  so  if  there 
\  be  no  cross  joints  in  the  track,  there  will  be  no  depressions  thereat,  but 
,  a  smooth  plain  obtained,  and  the  power  required  to  pull  loads  of  equal 
i -weights,  or  maintain  equal  speeds,  will  be  less  upon  the  compound  than 
$  upon  any  of  the  old  forms  of  rails.  But  the  advantages  of  a  continu- 
f'ous  track  over  one  composed  of  short  bars  laid  together  at  the  ends 
with  joints  (and  frequently  with  wide  spaces)  at  every  fifteen  or  tnent\ 


feet,  are  too  manifest  to  those  familiar  with  the  management  of  railroads 
to  need  demonstrating  at  my  hands/  It  is  admitted  by  all  that  the  form 
of  rail  in-  common  use  is  marked  by  serious  defects,  the  chief  of  which 
is  at  the  joints,  (the  weak  point  in  the  track,)  and  any  improvement 
that  obviates  these  evils,  accomplishes  a  very  important  desideratum, 
effects  a  great  saving  in  current  depreciation  of  both  rails  and  machine¬ 
ry,  and  correspondingly  in  the  cost  of  running  railroads,  while  it 
increases  materially  the  safety  and  comfort  of  all  who  travel  thereon. 

By  way  of  showing  that  these  claims  are  not  advanced  as  mere  as¬ 
sumptions,  I  invite  those  interested  in  such  matters  to  inspect  the  rail 
in  use.  A  word  as  to  the  cost  of  this  rail :  This,  under  certain  cir¬ 
cumstances,  may  be  something  greater  than  the  common  form,  owing 
to  the  enhanced  cost  of  manufacture ;  this,  however,  cannot  be  much, 
and  is  more  than  compensated  by  the  improved  quality  of  iron  obtained 
in  a  rail  of  this  form,  arising  from  the  greater  condensation  of  the 
iron ,  while  the  cost  of  placing  this  rail  upon  the  road  is  less  than  the 
common  form,  the  expense  of  rivets  and  riveting  being  less  than  the  cost 
of  chairs,  as  shown  by  the  following 

Common  or  solid  rail.— Cost  of  chairs,  fitting  same  to  rails 

and  cross  ties,  528  joints  per  mile,  at  55  cents  per  joint,  ^  ^ 

One  extra  spike  at  each  joint  is  528  spikes,  two  to  the  pound  ^ 

at  8  1-2  cents  per  pound,  is  . . . . 

Compound  Rail.— Rivets,  4,750,  5-8  diameter,  at  $300  00 

three  to  the  pound,*  is  1,583  pounds  to  the  mile  at 

4  3-4  cents  per  pound,  is  .;  . . . .  . .  W”  j: 

Riveting  at  24  cents  per  rod  is,  per  mile, .  1 ^ 

Difference  ft  favor  of  laying  one  mile  of  track  with  compound 

.  ..  . .  $448  00 

rail, . * . . . 

oir  about  onc-and-a-half  dollars  per  ton  of  iron. 


781309 


There  are  ten  miles  of  these  rails  upon  the  Utica  and  Schenectady 
railroad.  They  are  likewise  in  use  upon  the  New- York  and  Erie,  Phil¬ 
adelphia  and  Reading  railroads,  and  I  refer  to  the  annexed  correspond- 
ance  for  the  opinions  of  the  gentlemen  in  the  management  of  those 
roads,  as  to  its  merits.  I  think  I  am  justified  in  saying  that  enough  has 
been  done  by  way  of  trial  to  demonstrate  the  safety  and  economy  of 
this  rail. 

Orders  for  considerable  quantities  are  now  being  executed  for  the 
Hudson  River,  Rochester  and  Niagara  Falls,  Buffalo  and  Conhocton 


Valley,  Buffalo  and  Rochester,  Utica  and  Schenectady,  Syracuse  and 
Utica,  Michigan  Central,  Madison  and  Indianapolis,  Cleveland  and 
Columbus,  and  other  leading  roads  in  the  country. 

Commending  the  rail  to  your  consideration,  and  if  approved  of  solic¬ 
iting  your  patronage, 

I  remain  yours  very  respectfully, 

JOHN  F.  WINSLOW. 

Troy,  N.Y.7  "  185 >  - 


NEW-YORK  AND  ERIE  RAILROAD : 

Way  and  Structure  Department,  ) 
Engineer's  Office,  July  7,  1851.  j, 

J.  F.  Winslow,  Esq., 

Sir, — I  have  very  recently  made  a  critical  examination  of  the  com¬ 
pound  or  continuous  rail  put  down  on  this  road  by  Mr.  A.  B.  Seymour, 
in  September  1849.  This  rail  has  now  been  in  use  twenty-two  months , 
on  a  portion  of  the  main  line ,  nearly  two  miles  from  any  station,  where 
it  has  been  subjected  to  the  highest  speed  of  a  very  heavy  class  of  en¬ 
gines  and  cars.  According  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief, 
there  has  not  been  an  hour’s  work  done  in  adjusting  this  rail  since  it 
was  first  laid  ;  yet,  it  is  now  in  good  order,  and  shows  but  little  of  the 
effects  of  wear  and  tear. 

In  my  opinion  this  rail  is  the  safest  one  in  use,  and  with  slight  mo¬ 
dification  can  be  made  as  economical  if  not  much  more  so,  than  the  or¬ 
dinary  T  rail.  In  many  other  respects  I  consider  this  two-part  com¬ 
pound  rail  as  superior  to  any  other  with  which  I  am  acquainted. 

Very  respectfully, 

Your  obedient  servant, 

S.  S.  POST. 


Oepice  oe  the  Philadelphia  &  Reading  R.  R.  Co.,  ) 

Philadelphia,  June  26,  1851.  ), 

J.  F.  Winslow,  Esq., 

Dear  Sir, — I  duly  received  your  favor  of  the  21st  instant.  The 
compound  rail  seems  to  do  perfectly  well  thus  far. 

Yours  very  truly, 

JOHN  TUCKER,  President. 


Utica  and  Schenectady  R.  R.  Opeice,  ) 
Schenectady ,  March  1st,  1851.  ) 

J.  F.  Winslow,  Esq., 

Dear  Sir, — Yours  of  the  4th  of  February,  submitting  various  inter¬ 
rogatories  relative  to  the  “  Patent  Compound  Railroad  Iron  ”  furnished 
by  your  company,  and  laid  down  upon  this  road,  was  duly  received,  to 
which  I  shall  reply  in  general  terms,  making  the  ordinary  T  rail  the 
standard  of  comparison.  From  my  own  observation  and  the  experi¬ 
ence  of  locomotive  engineers,  who  are  daily  running  upon  the  compound 


in  connection  with  the  T  rail,  (which  is  superior  ®f  its  kind,)  I  am  clear¬ 
ly  of  the  opinion  that  there  is  a  saving  in  the  wear  and  tear  to  the  ma¬ 
chinery  of  at  least  twenty-five  per  cent. 

In  passing  from  the  T  to  the  compound  rail  with  the  trains,  a  much 
higher  rate  of  speed  is  attained  with  the  same  power,  which  can  onlv 
be  attributed  to  the  non-resistance  of  the  joints.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  a  less  expenditure  of  motive  power  is  required  upon  the 
compound  rail  in  pulling  loads  of  equal  weight,  but  to  what  extent  I 
am  unable  to  say. 

In  November,  1849,  about  one  thousand  feet  of  the  compound  rail', 
furnished  by  you,  was  laid  down  in  connection  with  the  T  rail,  in  the 
main  track,  over  which  all  trains  passing  westward  from  Schenectady 
were  run.  This  part  of  the  track  has  not  been  repaired  or  adjusted, 
nor  has  it  required  to  be,  while  the  T  rail,  which  was  laid  at  the  same 
time,  and  with  great  care,  has  required  repeated  adjustment ;  the  ten 
miles  laid  last  fall  has  also  kept  in  admirable  adjustment. 

The  experience  on  this  road,  in  that  respect,  is  the  same  as  upon  all 
others  where  the  T  rail  is  in  use.  A  very  large  proportion  of  the  ex¬ 
pense  of  adjusting  the  track,  is  at  the  joint  or  end  of  the  rail,  which  is 
caused  by  the  weakness  or  break  in  the  track  at  that  point. 

This  defect  is  entirely  obviated  by  the  use  of  the  compound  rail, 
which  gives  an  equal  and  perfect  bearing  upon  all  the  cross- ties,  there¬ 
by  reducing  the  expense  of  keeping  the  track  in  adjustment  more  than 
one  half.  No  part  of  the  compound  rail  has  broken  or  been  thrown  out, 
while  a  large  number  of  broken  and  defective  bars  of  the  T  rail  have 
been  removed  ;  neither  has  a  wheel  or  shaft  broken  upon  this  part  of 
the  rail. 

No  chair  is  required  in  laying  the  compound  rail,  the  saving  in  ex¬ 
pense  of  which  I  consider  more  than  equal  to  the  additional  cost  of 
rivets,  and  riveting  together  the  bars.  Two  or  three  rivets  only  have 
broken,  since  the  rail  has  been  in  use,  which,  upon  examination,  proved 
to  have  been  defective  when  driven. 

Additional  experience  is  wanted  to  determine  the  durability  of  the 
compound  rail,  in  comparison  with  the  T  rail,  that  the  result  will  be  in 
favor  of  a  compound  rail,  I  see  no  reason  to  doubt.. 

Very  respectfully, 

Your  obedient  servant, 

C.  VIBBARD,  Sup'U 


EXTRACTS 


From  a  Pamphlet  recently  published  by  B.  H.  Latrobe,  Esq.,  Civil  Engineer ,  entitled  u  Remarks,  upon  the  Defects  of  Railway 

Tracks ,  and  their  Remedy. ” 

- o — o - 


Although  tlie  railway  structure;  in  its  simple  elements,  is  not  an  invention  of 
modern  times,  (the  Egyptians  are  supposed  to  have  used  it,)  and  although  in 
its  more  mature  form,  it  is  now  upwards  of  twenty  years  old,  yet  it  is  still  in  a 
progressive  state,  and  is  admitted  on  all  hands  not  to  have  attained  perfection, 
but  to  be  marked  by  some  serious  defects.  The  best  evidence  of  this-,  is  the 
great  variety  of  opinions  which  still  prevail  in  regard  to  the  details  of  its  form 
and  combinations.  There  is  but  little  agreement  among  professional  men.  even 
in  the  leading  principles  of  the  structure — that  is,  in  regard  to  the  section  of  the 
rail,  the  mode  of  supporting  it,  the  manner  of  connecting  it  at  the  joint,  &c. 
The  undersigned  has  been  an  attentive  observer  of  the  constant  agitation  to 
which  these  questions  have  been  subjected,  and  has,  as  he  believes,  carefully 
and  impartially  weighed  the  arguments  for  and  against  the1  various  ways  propos¬ 
ed  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  object  which  all  have  had  in  view,  viz :  a  firm 
yet  somewhat  elastic  structure,  well  connected  at  the  joints  of  the  bars  and 
other  points  of  contact  of  the  different  pieces  composing  the  track,  and  yet 
readily  taken  apart  in  the  process  of  repair.  His  conclusion  has  been,  that 
there  were  radical  defects  in  all  the  existing  systems  of  form  and  combination 
of  parts,  defects  to  be  remedied  only  by  a  fundamental  change  in  some  of  the 
principles  of  the  structure,  and  in  his  view  the  cure  is  as  clear  as  the  cause  of 
these  imperfections. 

A  railway  track  has  always  heretofore  consisted  of  a  series  of  iron  bars,  of 
greater  or  less  length,  and  of  various  sectional  forms,  laid  together  at  the  ends, 
and  supported  throughout  their  lengths  in  various  ways.  Care  has  usually 
been  taken  to  give  these  bars  a  sufficiency  of  strength  in  themselves,  and  their 
supports,  to  make  them  form  a  solid  and  smooth  surface,  for  the  rolling  of  the 
wheels  upon  them  throughout  their  length;  and  if  the  bars  could  be  incorpo¬ 
rated  together  by  welding  at  their  ends,  or  in  other  words,  if  there  were  no 
joints  in  the  track,  there  would  be  little  left  to  desire  in  any  of  the  well  built 
railways  of  the  present  day;  for,  although  the  resistance  of  the  soil  on  which 
the  track  rests  not  being  uniform,  undulations  will  occur  in  the  surface  of  the 
rails,  yet  there  would  be  no  abrupt  depressions  or  elevations,  and  the  carriages 
would  oscillate  with  an  easy  swinging  movement,  attended  by  no  concussion. 
The  rails,  however,  not  being  continuous,  but  terminating  at  every  distance  of 
fifteen  or  twenty  feet,  the  wheel  has  to  pass  from  one  to  the  other,  over  a  very 
narrow  gap  it  is  true,  but  one  quite  wide  enough  almost  to  annihilate  the  resist¬ 
ance  of  the  bar  at  that  point  as  a  beam,  and  to  make  it  depend  for  its  power  to 
hold  up  the  wheel,  principally  upon  the  resistance  of  the  substance  supporting 
it  at  that,  spot,  whether  that  substance  be  a  longitudinal  bearer  or  cross  sleeper 
of  timber,  or  a  stone  block,  according  as  one  or  other  of  these  three  systems  of 
support  are  used.  Now,  to  give  the  bearer,  or  sleeper,  or  block,  the  resistance 
necessary  to  compensate  fully  the  loss  of  strength  as  a  beam,  which  the  bars 
sustain  at  their  ends,  has  been  in  practice  found  impracticable  although  an  ap¬ 
proximation  thereto  may  be  had  by  increasing  the  compactness  of  the  road-bed 
and  the  extent  of  surface  bearing  thereon  at  the  joints.  The  approximation, 
however,  is  always  an  uncertain  and,  at  best,  an  imperfect  one,  and  even  in  the 
case  of  the  continuous  timber  bearer  under  the  rail,  which  would  appear  to 
give  the  best  support  to  the  joints  of  the  bars,  the  result  is  unsatisfactory ;  the 
compressible  character  of  the  wood  always  permitting  the  rails  to  sink  into  it 
more  or  less  at  their  ends.  The  proved  impossibility  of  effectually  sustaining 
the  joints  by  increased  compactness  of  road-bed,  and  provision  of  additional 
bearing  surface,  has  induced  attempts  to  connect  the  iron  bars  at  their  points 
of  contact  so  as  to  form  a  splice,  for  the  restoration  of  the  strength  lost  at  this 
point.  But  all  such  efforts  have  proved  abortive,  the  effect  of  the  quick  passage 
of  heavy  trains  being  to  shake  and  wear  loose  all  the  fastenings  constituting  the 
splice,  and  it  is  now  quite  apparent  that  little  more  can  be  effected  at  the  joints 
than  to  keep  the  rails,  vertically  and  laterally,  sufficiently  in  place  to  permit  the 


wheel  to  pass  safely  from  one'  bar  to  another,  and  not  always  safely  indeed,  for 
there  are  not  wanting  instances  wherein  disastrous  accidents  have  been  occasion¬ 
ed  by  ther  escape  of  the  rail  from  what  confined  it  at  this  point.  The  only  real 
splice  that  has  been  thus  far  applied  to  the  joints  of  a  line  of  rails,  is  the  con¬ 
tinuous  bearing  timber;,  but  this,  in  consequence  of  the  yielding  of  the  wood, 
is  much  impaired  in  its  effect,  as  already  observed. 

I  make  the  preceding  statements  as  well  known  facts,  not  denied  by  any  one 
at  all  experienced  in  the  construction  and  maintenance  of  railways,  or  an  observ¬ 
ant  traveler  upon  them.  I  could  give,  were  it  necessary,  a  mass  of  detail  upon 
the  subject,  collected  in  my  own  visits  to  various  lines  of  railway,  and  in  my 
correspondence  with  my  professional  brethren  all  over  the  United  States.  Suf¬ 
fice  it  to  say,  that  the  existence  of  the  evil  of  bad  joints,  and'  the  difficulty  of 
dealing  with  it,  is  amply  demonstrated  by  the  variety  of  expedients  to  palliate 
what  is  conceded  to  be  incurable ..  Upon  one  line,  for  example,  are  to  be  found 
two  cast  iron  chairs,  weighing  together  45  pounds,  applied  to  each  bar ;  and 
upon  another  line  no  chairs  at  all,  but  the  rails  simply  let  into  the  sleepers  at 
the  ends  and  spiked  down.  Upon  other  roads  a  chair  weighing  from  15  to  25 
pounds,  with  a  wooden  key  to  hold  fast  the  rail  in  it..  Upon  others  again  chairs 
weighing  from  12  to  20  pounds,  with-  a  lip  on  each  side  to  lap  tightly  over  the 
bottom  flanges  of  the  rail.  On  others  a  simple  plate  to  support  the  ends  of  the 
bars  and  keep  them  sidewise  in  place,  depending  upon  spikes  to  held  them 
down.  On  others  the  same  plate  with  screw  bolts  in  place  of  spikes;  and  last¬ 
ly,  upon  one  or  two  roads,  two  splice  plates  fitting  on  each  side  into  the  hollows 
of  the  rail  and  drawn  tight  by  screw  or  cotter  bolts  in  a  horizontal  position. 
None  of  these  modes  of  making  the  joints  secure,  operate  as  a  splice  in  effect, 
or  but  partially  at  the  first,  for  the  violent  blow  given  to  the  end  of  the  bar  by 
every  passing  wheel,  soon  jars  loose  the  firmest  grip  that  these  fastenings  can 
take.  The  wooden  keys,  besides  their  swelling  and  shrinking  as  the  atmosphere 
changes,  soon  loosen,  and  the  continual  driving  of  them  up  rapidly  wears  them 
out.  The  spikes  break,  the  screw  bolts  either  snap  off  or  have  their  thread 
stripped,  and  the  keys  of  the  cotter  bolts  become  bent  and  broken  from  driving 
them  up.  The  tight  fitting  clamp  chair  breaks- or  wears  loose  in  its  lips.  In 
short,  no  fastening  that  can  be  applied  at  this  point  holds  it  long,  and  where,  in 
despair  of  getting  any  contrivance  to  stand,  all  are  rejected  and  the  rail  is  simply 
nailed  down  upon  the  sleeper,  the  latter  is  soon  deeply  indented  and  rapidly 
worn  away  by  the  bars  it  supports.  These  mischiefs  are  of  course  most  observ¬ 
able  in  the  lines  of  heavy  traffic  and  sometime  in  use.  Upon  the  great  trunk 
line  between  Boston  and  Albany,  opened  in  1842,  the  clattering  and  thumping 
of  the  joints  was  deafening  when  I  passed  over  it  in  1848;  the  chairs  and  ends 
of  bars  having  become  loose  in  their  fit,  from  the  wear  of  six  or  seven  years, 
and  on  the  same  line  large  renewals  of  rails  had  then,  and  are  now,  annually 
taking  place,  chiefly  in  consequence  of  the  effect  upon  the  ends  of  the  bars  of 
the  blows  received  there.  ******* 

It  should  be  mentioned,  while  speaking  of  the  difficulties  of  maintaining  the 
joints  of  a  track,  that  the  endwise  movement  of  the  rail,  under  the  blow  of 
the  wheel,  is  one  of  the  most  prominent.  The  bars  are  not  all  operated  on 
alike  by  this  cause,  and  consequently,  some  being  pushed  further  than  others, 
the  openings  at  the  joints  become  irregular,  some  being  closed  entirely,  and 
others  widely  open.  This  movement  of  the  rail  is  a  very  dangerous  one,  and 
unless  watched,  would  soon  force  the  rails  quite  out  of  their  chairs,  especially 
upon  double  lines  of  railway,  where  the  movement  of  the  trains,  on  each  track, 
is  always  in  the  same  direction. 

The  evils  have  been  now,  perhaps,  sufficiently  descanted  upon,  and  we  will 
proceed  to  speak  of  their  remedy. 

Instead  of  making  the  rails  in  solid  or  single  bars,  laid  end  to  end,  it  is  pro¬ 
posed  to  make  them  in  parts  combining  to  form  the  cross  section  of  the  rail ; 


these  parts  breaking  joints  with  each  other,  and  held  together  by  rivets,  so  as 
to  form  in  effect  a  continuous  bar  of  compound  structure,  being  as  near  an  ap¬ 
proach  to  an  unbroken  line  of  iron  as  it  is  physically  possible  to  make.  The 
necessity  of  providing  for  contraction  and  expansion  and  for  repairs  to  those 
parts  of  the  rail,  which,  from  the  unavoidable  inequalities  in  the  texture 
of  the  metal,  will  require  to  be  renewed  at  different  times,  manifestly 
renders  the  welding  of  the  bars  together  at  their  ends,  impracticable.  We  must 
then  break  up  the  body  of  the  iron  into  parts,  which  may  shrink  and  di¬ 
late,  and  be  removed  and  replaced,  independently  of  each  other ;  and  the  ques¬ 
tion  is,  how  this  division  of  the  mass  shall  be  effected?  Hitherto  it  has  been 
by  simply  cutting  off  the  line  at  intervals,  the  mischiefs  of  which  mode  have 
been  fully  shown.  The  other  mode  now  proposed,  is  to  divide  the  mass  not 
only  cross- wise,  but  longitudinally ;  that  is,  not  only  in  length  but  in  section, 
making  the  several  parts  resulting  from  this  sectional  division  unite  at  different 
points  in  the  length  of  the  line,  so  that  the  wheel  will  always  be  sustained  by 
the  strength  of  one  portion  of  the  rail,  while  passing  over  the  gap  occasioned  by 
the  division  of  another  portion.  It  is,  in  short,  nothing  more  than  the  applica¬ 
tion  of  the  “break  joint”  principle  to  rails,  so  long  recognized,  and  so  success¬ 
fully  used  in  carpentry  and  framing  of  every  kind,  and  indeed,  in  the  railway 
itself,  by  those  -who  prefer  the  continuous  bearing  timber  to  the  cross  sleeper  or 
the  stone  block.  By  this  division  of  the  bar,  a  portion  of  its  extreme  strength 
is  relinquished,  the  compound  bar  being,  at  its  strongest  point,  somewhat 
weaker  than  the  solid  bar,  in  the  middle  of  its  length.  But  as  the  maximum 
of  strength  is  less  in  the  compound  bar,  so  the  minimum  is  much  greater,  and 
thus  that  approach  to  uniformity  of  strength  is  effected,  which  is  the  desid¬ 
eratum;  a  structure  presenting  an  alternation  of  very  strong  and  very  weak 
points,  being  of  all  others  the  worst.  It  has  been  said,  that  the  compound  bar  is 
somewhat  weaker  in  its  strongest  point,  (which  would  be  the  point  midway  be¬ 
tween  any  two  contiguous  joints,)  than  the  single  bar  in  the  middle  of  its 
length.  But  the  difference  would  be  less  considerable  than  might  be  sup¬ 
posed.  I  judge  from  an  experiment  made  with  a  compound  bar  of  fifty  pounds 
per  yard,  and  a  solid  bar  of  similar  weight,  but  of  the  bridge  pattern.  The  two 
bars,  with  a  clear  bearing  of  three  feet,  and  under  a  strain  of  three  tons,  applied 
to  the  middle  of  their  lengths,  exhibited  the  same  deflection,  although  the  com¬ 
pound  bar  had  one  of  its  joints,  (in  one  of  the  under  sections,)  between  the 
bearings.  I  do  not  quote  the  experiment  as  conclusive.  It  was  but  a  single 
one,  and  may  have  been  under  the  influence  of  some  circumstance  not  observed, 
which  gave  too  favorable  a  result  for  the  compound  bar.  But  while  conceding 
fully,  that  there  is  a  reduction  of  the  maximum  of  strength,  the  more  than  cor¬ 
responding  increase  in  the  minimum,  already  claimed  for  the  composite  rail,  is  | 
an  invaluable  acquisition.  The  loss  of  extreme  strength  is,  however,  not  the 
only  objection  that  might  naturally  be  urged  against  the  compound  rail,  and,  if  j 
that  compound  principle  has  been  already  thought  of  in  England,  its  practical 
application  has  probably  been  prevented  by  the  objection  now  to  be  mentioned. 

I  refer  to  the  supposed  difficulty  of  connecting,  in  a  substantial  and  satisfactory  | 
manner,  the  parts  into  which  the  bar  is  divided,  so  as  to  make  them  hold  well 
together  without  shaking,  or  working,  or  breaking,  or  looseness  of  any  kind, 
and  so  also  as  to  permit  them,  at  the  same  time,  to  yield  freely  to  the  effects  of 
changes  of  temperature. 

In  reflecting  upon  the  subject,  I  am  so  strongly  impressed  with  the  superior-'  j 
ity  of  the  compound  principle  as  to  feel  amazed  that  it  has  not,  long  ago,  been 
adopted,  and  can  only  account  for  the  fact  that  it  has  not,  by  this  last  consider¬ 
ation,  which,  I  confess,  operated  awhile  upon  my  own  mind,  so  as  to  make  me 
in  the  outset  not  entirely  confident  of  its  success.  My  professional  friends,  in¬ 
deed,  nearly  all  hung  back  at  first  upon  this  ground,  admitting  that  the  idea  in 
the  abstract  was  a  happy  one;  but  fearing  its  defeat  by  the  supposed  impossibility 
of  holding  the  parts  properly  together.  Nothing  short  of  experimental  demonstra¬ 
tion  would  be  satisfactory  in  this,  more  than  in  other  cases.  The  fact  that  the 
fundamental  principles  involved  in  the  structure  of  the  rail,  were  altogether  in 
favor  of  what  was  aimed  at,  did  not  seem  to  me  to  make  a  due  impression. 
Because  the  fastenings,  by  which  it  was  attempted  to  connect  the  solid  bars  at 
their  ends,  failed  to  perform  their  intended  functions,  so  must  the  attachments  ! 


3  0112  077581202 

of  the  compound  barf  But  the  distinction  in  the  two  cases,  consists  simply  in 
the  prevalence  in  the  two  plans  of  two  opposite  principles;  in  the  solid  rail  the 
principle  of  concentration,  and  in  the  compound  rail  the  principle  of  diffusion. 
In  the  former,  the  whole  shock  experienced  in  passing  the  point  of  separation 
of  the  bars,  is  concentrated  at  one  point,  the  single  joint;  in  the  latter,  the  one 
great  shock  is  divided  into  two  or  three  very  much  lesser  shocks,  and  thus  is 
diffused  with  a  greatly  diminished  intensity  over  the  whole  length  of  the  bar, 
and  the  fastenings  being  also  similarly  dispersed  along  the  bar,  the  scattered 
and  softened  concussions  are  effectually  resisted  by  them.  It  wrould  be  difficult, 
indeed  impracticable,  to  compare  the  different  momenta  of  the  mass  which  ex¬ 
periences  these  shocks,  in  the  cases  of  the  two  kinds  of  bars;  as  to  do  so,  with  pre¬ 
cision,  it  would  be  necessary  to  know  exactly  the  relative  spaces  through  which 
the  wheel  of  the  carriage  would  fall,  in  passing  the  single  joint  of  the  solid  bar, 
and  the  two  or  three  joints  of  the  compound  bar.  There  can,  however,  be  no 
doubt  that  the  sum  of  the  momenta,  in  the  latter  case,  would  fall  much  within 
the  single  momentum  in  the  former  case,  and  that,  therefore,  the  carriage  and 
the  rail  would  sustain  much  less  injury  from  the  shocks  occurring  in  passing 
over  the  compound  bar. 

But  leaving  the  mathematics  of  the  matter,  I  will  go  to  ti  e  more  practical 
views  to  be  taken  of  the  subject,  and  to  the  light  which  the  experience  which 
has  happily  been  obtained,  casts  thereon.  I  have  thus  far  discussed  the  priii0- 
ple  of  the  compound  rail  in  the  general,  and  without  reference  to  any  of  the 
various  forms  it  may  assume.  But  I  will  now  say,  that  notwithstanding  the 
tardiness  with  which  most  of  the  engineers  of  this  country,  to  whom  the  im¬ 
provement  has  been  submitted,  have  seemed  disposed  to  yield  their  assent  to 
its  value,  there  is  a  growing  feeling  in  its  favor.  *  *  *  *  And  if  we  admit 

that  the  composite  rail  is,  in  the  abstract,  the  best  form,  we  have  then  to  choose 
between  the  possible  varieties  of  this  form,  that  may  be  suggested.  *  *  *  * 

Were  I  compelled  to  choose  I  would  take  the  simplest  and  most  symmetrical  of 
them.  ********** 

I  have  no  means  of  comparing  the  cost  of  maintaining  a  “permanent  way,” 
upon  my  plan  with  that  of  any  of  the  various  existing  modes  of  construction  ,  in 
England.  I  am  very  confident,  however,  that  the  difference  in  favor  of  the 
former  would  be  very  great  indeed.  *  *  * 

I  am  satisfied  that  not  less  than  a  third  of  the  labor  of  adjustment  will  be 
saved,  and  the  renewal  of  materials  should  be  in  at  least  as  favorable  a  propor¬ 
tion.  *  *********** 

All  that  is  required  for  this  purpose  being  the  cutting  off  the  rivet  heads  with  a 
chisel.  But  this  will  be  an  operation  rarely  required,  and  the  cheapness  of  the 
rivets  makes  the  cost  of  material  a  matter  of  little  consequence.  If  I  am  right 
in  my  suppositions,  then  the  superior  safety  and  smoothness  of  the  new  track, 
attended  by  a  considerable  reduction  in  the  cost  of  repairs  to  engines  and  car¬ 
riages,  and  a  great  increase  of  public  security  and  comfort,  and  consequently 
an  accession  to  the  popularity  of  railways  as  a  means  of  travel,  would  all  com¬ 
bine  to  place  the  value  of  the  improvement  in  a  very  conspicuous  position. 
******** 

Among  the  merits  of  the  compound  rail,  will  be  apparent  that  of  retaining 
its  line  in  curves,  better  than  the  solid  rail ;  the  breaking  of  the  joints  producing 
in  the  bearing  rails  a  mutual  counteraction  of  the  tendency  to  straighten  into 
chords,  after  being  sprung  to  the  curve.  With  bars  so  long  as  20  feet,  it  is 
supposed  that,  even  in  the  heaviest  patterns,  it  will  not  be  necessary  to  set 
them,  by  previous  bending,  which,  in  the  solid  rail,  would  be  indispensable. 

A  very  remarkable  advantage  from  the  division  of  the  rail  into  parts  will  also 
be  the  improvement  in  the  quality  of  the  metal.  The  disposition  to  increase  of 
weight,  has  been  checked  by  the  difficulty  of  making  a  heavy  bar  perfect.  It 
is  understood  that  the  rails  of  100  lbs.  per  yard  recently  rolled,  have  turned 
out  so  indifferently  as  to  induce  a  return  to  lighter  patterns.  However  this 
may  be,  .it  is  quite  certain  that  a  single  bar  of  any  weight  cannot  be  made  as 
sound  and  tough,  as  two  or  three  bars  of  the  same  length  and  aggregate  section. 
The  compound  principle  will  permit  the  tendency  to  increased  weight  of  rail 
to  go  much  farther  than  would  be  possible  in  the  single  rail. 


